Antarctica's Tipping Point - The Science of Ice Collapse
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 жов 2022
- Antarctica may be melting faster than anyone realizes, and the implications for humanity are potentially disastrous. Not only will sea levels rise increasingly this century, but if the West Antarctic Ice Sheet is destabilized, the process could be continuous and irreversible for centuries to come.
Dr Tim Naish explains what Antarctic climate scientists are finding out, why they are so concerned.
Many thanks to the creator John Weller who has kindly allowed me to host this video.
Check out John's other great science videos on UA-cam / @oceanvoice3468
Keen to massively BOOST YOUR SCIENCE COMMUNICATION IMPACT? More info here: courses.outtherelearning.co.n...
Visiting schools to talk about your science? This is how to TURN INFORMATION INTO INSPIRATION!: courses.outtherelearning.co.n...
Interested in my activities, thoughts and ideas on science communication and education? Sign up for my NEWSLETTER:
julianthomson.substack.com/ - Наука та технологія
Looking at these scenarios it makes you question why govts are still encouraging ppl to live near the coast. Its either build huge sea walls or move inland.
That's where most of the jobs are, that's why people move there.
I don't think it is encouraged, simply people love to live near the coast .
Obama bought a house in Martha's Vinyard. If these people were actually worried they wouldnt buy homes worth a few million of they were actually worried. Oh also they wouldnt charter private flights.
Governments are corrupted by the rich elite who have a lot of stranded assets
Because humanity is expendable and the elite freemasons know it (species management). If they know about any type of cyclical catastrophe, they'll be planning to survive while the rest of us don't. That's what I'd do, if I were them! Then you can control repopulation and OWN society!
I remember reading years ago, that there are indications in the paleo record that W. Antarctica has become ice free over the time scale of decades multiple times in the past. It's a massive tipping point.
Yes, it happened without the help of humans.
@@snorfallupagus6014 So that means we probably shouldn't be doing all we can to replicate something we know can happen.
@@poulthomas469exactly!
@@snorfallupagus6014 Yeah, over the course of tens to hundreds of thousands of years, and not a couple centuries. Plus, it wouldn't matter who or what caused it: we won't be able to sustain 8 billion people on a significantly hotter world.
It is just nature. We are not supposed to stop it or mess with it. Although many of us will die trough these events not all of us will actually die. After this we start all over again. And this happens for millions of years. It is all very logical😂
What caused the rise in CO2 three million years ago?
Man?
Great question and one that has been debated quite a lot. That's why we need researchers to find that stuff out. Thanks for your comment.
...and what caused its eventual decline?
Carbon tax?
@@besticudcumupwith202 😄
CO2 and methane have acted as important amplifiers of the climate changes triggered by variations in Earth’s orbit around the Sun. Changes in ocean temperature, circulation, chemistry, and biology caused more CO2 to be released to the atmosphere, which combined with other feedbacks to push Earth into a warmer state until planetary orbit put Earth back into a cooler state.
That is still debated, though we have other shifts in climate with better evidence. Moreover, as far as known, we can't find any natural cause that explains current climate change without human contribution.
Since this video we have learned that the Greenland ice cap is melting now at a rate in one year what scientists estimated would happen in 100 years and we have learned that Thwaites is melting from below also at a much faster rate than thought just months ago
Thank you for your information
I've seen pictures of the Thwaites glacier advancing. Also the Danish Met. Service satellite shows over the recent years to be gaining ice like as at present.
Why do you not even mention the effects of the tremendous volcanic effect that is occurring under and around the western edge of Antarctica?
Not true
@@bobdooly3706you don’t need an imagination or even a degree in climate science to just do a little research on what is happening to glaciers around the world today in fact you could google Thwaites glacier and get all the scientific information you need to know that we have already altered and destabilized the western Iceland ice sheets and landed glaciers and if you want to have a fact based understanding of what is happening do the science instead of your very simplistic thinking 🤔 so brainiac why is the west Antarctic ice sheet destabilizing
I thought I had a reasonable grasp of the future but seeing and hearing this factual and succinct explaination has me so worried for future generations.
His propaganda got you
This adversity will make future generations stronger. Of course it's not my goal to melt the arctic, but if it's bound to happen, then one should plan accordingly.
Nar dont worry what you should do is look what they predicted in the past All wrong man has been predicting scince year dot there has always been people trying to tell people the world is going to end they go by computer models it is what you put in computer that gives answer you want and just remember we have a lot of scientist but how many bright ones
@@DJRonnieG There is still pack ice in the Weddel sea. 100 years ago, someone sailed all the way up to the land there.
Weddell got to 74° south in 1823. It was in a flimsy boat of the times.
In 1915, Ernest Shackleton's ship, Endurance, got trapped and was crushed by ice in this sea. They made it to 68° South, before sinking further north in pack ice.
In 2018 shipping could not get further south than Joinville Island. Pack ice was thick and clearly visible to all who went there. This was a long way north from Paulet Island and Snow Hill Island where Nordenskjöld was trapped in 1903.
These are historical records. Science does not lie, but scientists do lie.
@FredSythe I appreciate your comment reply and the historical info. Just today I left comments under some climate videos. One from Astrum (he at least tries to be nuanced) and another from this commie YT channel called "Climate Town"... UA-cam channel is run by a bunch of soy boys.
Historically humans rarely learn from their mistakes.
That's why C-19 is such a huge success at depopulation.
@@GordoGambler LOL it all comes back to covid with you people doesn't it
@@GordoGambler I'd like to see your data to support that. All the data I have seen has shown minimal change in mortality. What was told to us by media and governments was absolutely false and misleading and is now being challenged in courts around the world. Pfizer is also having to answer some very tough questions. The safety of a vaccine was not established by testing and now the bodies are piling up on their doorstep. People are waking up to the truth very slowly but I'm picking we are nearing a tipping point. What will that look like I wonder when the majority lose trust in their media and their government? Don't fear me my family and I are safe, we have all had c-19 and we are not jabbed. We watch the coming collapse with interest.
@@GordoGambler Pffffhahahaha! What depopulation? Compare the total population of 7.6+ BILLION PEOPLE against the paltry few millions that have been put six feet under by Covid. It's NOTHING, completely inconsequential.
If the goal was to grow the population, a main indicator of the success of a species, we did a great job.
The BEST film on SUDDEN ABRUPT SEA LEVEL RISE I HAVE BEEN STUDYING ANTARTICA FOR 30 years and this is the best film I ever watched. You really tell the truth!!!!!!!!!!
Good that way everybody can visit the city discovered by the Chile explorers now it is forbiden or even fly near that area
I live in the Midwest of the US, and nature's confused. New daylily leaves, hosta leaves and lilac leaves are coming forth here in November. That's not the usual.
In the Ozarks, all the leaves seemed to fall off the trees at once after two below 20 degree nights in early October. This has never happened in my lifetime. I'm usually raking leaves well into December.
For our garden, In one season we had to use both frost cloth and shade cloth, then frost cloth again. Our yield was less than half of usual. So we decided to create a garden room indoors to grow food more reliably throughout the year. Like scallions, celery, herbs, greens, cabbage, cherry tomatoes, carrots, peas, sweet potatoes, Meyer lemons, and green beans. We'll still grow other vegetables, potatoes, maize, sunflowers, sunchokes, and beans outdoors. Thank goodness we live well above sea level because I expect the Mississippi River to reach my driveway if sea levels rise significantly. So glad we don't live in Florida!
Living in New Zealand in the late 90's to mid 2,000's we had what we all called a fifth season, basically spring started during what should have been winter. I live in Australia now so don't know if it's still going on but it was weird. Peoples flower gardens were starting to bloom, pip fruits like apple & pear trees were blossoming etc
@@GeckoHiker there was a "La Nina" cold water system that lasted unusually long in the Pacific Ocean - but it's going hot this year, and you should expect a lot more moisture in the air affecting storms and temperatures. It's different in different places, but watch for pressure changes that push or pull the jet stream north or south in the fall
@Todd Jones Oh, joy! I hope I can keep my crop of tomatoes going through the changes. The last time we experienced this there was so much rain the tomatoes burst from the extra water they absorbed. I don't know how commercial farmers will manage. Once again, indoor gardens could help folks supplement their vegetable needs more efficiently. Thanks for the information!
But politicians, economists, and pundits say this can't happen!
Agreed but secretly building there bunkers for the rich
The rich are buying mansions at the sea-shore, don't they?
I'm at risk of glaciers having a tipping point. Due to two reasons,
First as explained in this video, And due to the fact I'm 30 miles
as a bird flies to an active Caldera under a massive amount of
ice. Once that ice weight is shed I expect mud flow and worse
from the volcano.
Good luck.
Why don't you move.
Our work in climate, renewables, sustainability, adaptation & mitigation is so very important to both ecosystems and the economy. The faster we shift, the more we save and conserve. We must work together, coordinate, cooperate, and accelerate smart shifts personally, socially, politically, and economically if we are to succeed.
Thank you for your comment
@@OutThereLearning - just posted to 37 climate groups on LinkedIn with total memberships of over 750,000. I hope people watch, learn, and share.
Another instability involves the depression of the melting point of fresh water ice under pressure. It amounts to about a degree C per km depth of sea water. The WAIS is grounded on a retrograde slope extending down to 2km, and the slightly warmer salty circumpolar water flows down this slope whenever and were ever is over tops the seaward sill. Sea water which used to be cooler would only melt the floating ice at sea level relatively slowly. Once we have given sea water access to the bottom of the glacier at depth, even if we could cool this water to the previous levels, it would melt the ice because of the depression of its melting point at depth. Since there doesn't seem to be any liklyhood that we will even cool the salty circumpolar water to its previous levels, the rate of melting is doubly assured.
And yet our world population is growing, and the amount of pollution is increasing day by day. As I see it, our children and their children will be dealing with cataclysmic events. We should have started reductions 50 years ago. I am 74; the day I was born, there were 2.5 billion people, and now there are 8.2 billion people.
Thank you for your comment. Yes, it is nothing if not sobering
Exact same problem as with Motorways (Freeways) though some realized it's endless. Kevin Costner pointed it out first, "If you build it they will come". That's Life and (unfortunately) Insufficient Food is the only answer.
In America they still arguing this isn’t even real. Bruh. We doomed.
Not just America!
That's because it's not real.
This cycle was going to happen with or without human influence. I don’t necessarily doubt human influence accelerates the cycle and is bad for our sustainability ; however, I think we should all be clear our governments “green plans” are curated for the profits of the billionaire class, and don’t actually help. Examples: off shore windmill farms are killing whales, solar panels run lead into our soil after rain, they still fly private jets everywhere.
Young people reacting to this crisis can not overcome the efforts of older people that are killing off every living organism on the planet. There are absolutely no plans to stop fossil fuel production and consumption anytime in the near future, so how can this be avoided?
There has been an observed gain in the extent of Antarctic sea ice since 1979 and observed cooling of the Southern Ocean . Shortcomings in scientific modelling has failed to predict these trends. .
The Southern Annular Mode (SAM) is a pattern westerly winds circling Antarctica. SAM is influenced by El Niño-Southern Oscillation conditions, so it is partly driven by natural oscillations. At the same time, anthropogenic global warning tips SAM into its positive mode more frequently, and the resulting wind effects generally tend to increase Antarctic sea ice extent. SAM also affects the Amundsen Sea Low, which in turn affects sea ice transport and weather conditions over a broad area from the western Antarctic Peninsula to the eastern Ross Sea.
Long story short: Climate change has a discernible influence on Arctic sea ice, but it has a complicated influence on Antarctic sea ice. Meanwhile, the Antarctic Ice Sheet is losing mass.
@@hosnimubarak8869 In the meantime in remains for scientific modelling of future trends to be proved accurate.
@@RS25855 Much modelling. Plenty of politics. Scant science.
@@RS25855
Some past models proved to be quite accurate.
The tipping point and positive feedback loop that most concerns me is thawing of methane hydrates in the ocean and the methane release from permafrost thawing. The addition of massive quantities of this strong greenhouse gas to the atmosphere could be 'game over' for humanity.
That is going to be bad enough, but another major concern is that warmer oceans will absorb less CO2, as it’s less soluble as the sea warms. So even if we manage to slow the rate of emissions, ACO2 will likely continue to climb.
@@Stealthbong The flaw in your theory - the notion of this CO2 - the atmosphere warming the sea is fatuous. I guess you know that winds evaporate the ocean surface, and atmospheric heat -taken *from* the sea - rises in huge thermals from the surface of the sea, and most of earth's heat loss occurs by this very mechanism? The top six feet of ocean hold more thermal energy than the whole of the atmosphere.
Surely it must have occurred to you that at least some - and perhaps most - of the increase in CO2 has been the result of the oceans giving up their CO2 - as you confirm? You know that the oceans hold fifty times more CO2 than the atmosphere, and the ocean is continually carbonated by huge areas of submarine geothermal and volcanic activity? The edges of the tectonic plates are pretty much all submerged, and *liquid* CO2 is forced continually from the geothermal and lava vents into the ocean and at pressure so high the CO2 forms *liquid* bubbles? Tens of thousands of miles of *unexplored* ocean trenches where the Earth's crust is arguably at its thinnest - seabed into the ocean? Subsumed ocean currents carry this CO2 away and it can *stay* submerged for tens and even hundreds of years. What would stop it entering the atmosphere as warm currents surface, i.e. the PDO and the AMO (huge, warm surface currents in the Pacific and Atlantic?
You know, of course that *all* new CO2 came - and still comes - from this source? The source the IPCC freely admit they have never quantified>
You know that we have just emerged from the coldest period in the Holocene - the last 10,000 years? The Little Ice Age - when millions starved and froze across Europe. When there were almost no sun spots? You mean that a degree or so of temperature rise since that time did not *already* infuse the atmosphere with more CO2 - before man even got started? How not?
That is something ACO2 alarmists will have to explain, because all the IPCC's formulae appear to attribute *all* of the CO2 increase to human activity - even though the increase in CO2 got started *before* human emissions ramped up, and temperatures fell after the war despite a huge ramp up in industrial production and domestic emissions.
You know that the IPCC has never accounted for (i.e. produced a realistic estimate for) this source (the oceans giving up CO2) in their much-vaunted studies? E.g. even since the latest report, 100 new volcanoes were discovered beneath the Ice in Antarctica?
oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/explorations/04fire/logs/april10/april10.html
@@grahambennett8151 _The flaw in your theory - the notion of this CO2 - the atmosphere warming the sea is just fatuous_
Can I just stop you there, Graham. First up, I didn't actually make this claim. And secondly, why do you think the whole idea of the oceans absorbing CO2 from the atmosphere is a) _mine_ and b) a theory?
I don't study the oceans, but I do like to read about what's happening to them as a result of global warming from the researchers that do study them. If that's you, then where can I find some of your research? I'm genuinely interested in learning.
You certainly appear to believe you know things about oceanic carbon flux that those who study the oceans have missed, which begs the question what you are doing wasting your time on UA-cam, trying to convince nobodies like me, when you could be making a name for yourself writing some killer rebuttals to research papers.
Your comment is very long and you've clearly made a lot of effort, so let's take it point by point.
You say _I guess you know that winds evaporate the ocean surface_
You obviously know much more about this stuff than me, so can you just explain how wind causes evaporation? It was my understanding that it's actually heat that causes evaporation, and the wind simply speeds up this process by carrying away the moist air to allow more evaporation.
@@grahambennett8151 While we wait for you to explain how wind causes evaporation, let's look at your second point.
You say _Surely it must have occurred to you that at least some - and perhaps most - of the increases in CO2 has been the result of the oceans giving up their CO2_
Once again, I don't study either the oceans or the atmosphere - everything I know about the climate comes from climate researchers and the papers they publish. If you think they are wrong, and that the very rapid growth in CO2 in the atmosphere comes not from the 36 billion tons of annual anthropogenic emissions but from the oceans degassing, well, where is your evidence? And what do you think has happened to all that CO2 mankind has emitted into the atmosphere if you think the oceans are responsible for raising the atmospheric concentrations? I look forward to your insights on this.
The IPCC does a review of published articles (meta-analysis); & tries to draw reasonable conclusions with regards present climate change affecting life on Earth. At present, ocean pH levels are an issue for the survival of ocean life. That is, with our present understanding, increased temperatures results in increased acidity. At present, the pH level in oceans, is around 8, an alkaline level conducive for shell formation in sea animals. We have a tendency to learn.
I remember visiting glacier national Park when it had glaciers. It's all melting away.
Hollywood CGI normal stuff by the globalist
(^to many people unironically think this stuff)
Tony Heller did a good video on Glacier National Park....
ua-cam.com/video/MsV3-xILVew/v-deo.html
You're welcome.
We're in a leaky Canoe, without a paddle, and our family are in the Canoe, and theres a waterfall on the horizon.....
Time to crack out the parachutes.
20 Meter is devastating ...
I am 800 km from Bangkok and wonder how silent they keep on building there : Streets and no any sign to move to a new capital as Jakarta ...
I am to old to see standing water there, nut my daughter will be able to visit Bangkok via boat, like Venice. ...
No one listen today, but then they will cry ... as always, too late.
Ok, now a do a video on the methane trapped in Siberian permafrost.
Canada too, globally! A series!
Get this, one and all: Calving is not melting. It is arguably the opposite. The ice only melts fully once it enters the ocean. Antarctic is land, but a lot of it is below sea level, and the glaciers sit on the sea bed for tens or hundreds of miles. Like all land, Antarctica slopes towards the sea in places called - wait for it - valleys. Ice slides down the valleys to the ocean. It reaches the ocean because it has *not* melted. When it reaches the ocean - which is liquid - the ice resting on the seabed naturally melts, and the movement of the ocean and the buoyancy of the ice makes it float upwards and break off from the end of the downward-pointing glacier. Once calved, the ice mass floats away, and being mostly submerged, it melts. in the water. Ice does that. It always has done. More than 100 years ago, when CO2 levels were much lower than today's, the Titanic sailed into a whole field of such ice..
Oh, and by the way, did you know they have discovered 100 new volcanoes under the Antarctic ice. So spoiler alert: water, volcanoes and geothermal activity melt ice. The average temperature in the Antarctic is tens of degrees below zero, and despite the Holocene maximum, the Roman Warm Period an the Medieval Warm Period, ice never melted away. The ice cores drilled into the Antarctic Ice show a continuous, unbroken temperature record for more than one million years, much of which was warmer than today. Relax. Antarctic Ice ain't going anywhere anytime soon no matter what man does.
Here's another stat. I just read two shock headlines. Apparently Antarctica lost 2.71 trillion tons of ice recently. Pretty scary till you realise that the world has 30,000 trillion tons of it. Likewise, a study found that the world had lost 30 trillion tons of ice since the early nineties. You know people are trying to scare you when they don't tell you that 30 trillion tons is one thousandth of the worlds ice, and it took thirty years for it to melt. I doubt they can even measure the world's ice to a one thousandth precision - i.e. an error of one tenth of one percent.
Enjoy the warmth whilst it's here. We are overdue for an ice age. One degree or so colder killed millions of across Europe in the Little Ice Age - 1300 - 1850 AD. Be thankful we got more sunspots and the Earth warmed. And one last parting shot - apparently the Martian ice grows and shrinks in concert with the Earth's. Go figure why that might be, if not variations in solar activity.
Spot on mate. Tony Heller said something to this nature recently: "Saying glacial carving is evidence of global warming would be equivalent to saying water flowing over Niagra Falls is evidence of a drought". Couldn't be more accurate. A glacier that isn't calving is infact evidence that the glacier is dying. So the alarmists have it completely opposite!
@aarqa But it has only ever been natural processes. Man-made Climate Change is exactly that, made-up by man. It has never existed in the real world. Every forecast and prediction by every Climate Change scientist and repeated by gullible politicians has failed to materialise. That should show everyone that their theory is busted - becaise that's precisely how one busts a theory - if it fails to correctly predict the outcome then the theory has been falsified - yet Sheeple will keep giving these charlitans multiple attempts to stick the donkey's tail on it's arse.
Attribution of natural processes to man's evil actions against the planet is as close as it comes to superstition. Nowadays, rather than offering live sacrifices to the gods, we're being told that there's too many humans living on this fragile eco-system, so its time to cut back on the numbers - so the future generations are to be sacrificed. This climate change religion is pure evil.
@@stevetitcombe939
"Every forecast and prediction by every Climate Change scientist and repeated by gullible politicians has failed to materialise",
Not true, some past climate models proved to be quite accurate.
@aarqa LOL
@aarqa A couple of possible reasons:
1) We can't defend against every threat, so it is important we do *not* spend what little tax dollars we have left - after fighting pointless wars and feathering the nests of ruthless politicians - on *phantom threats*. We need to spend our limited cash on present threats of disease, sanitation, hunger and poverty. To defend against *all* threats is to truly defend against *none*. Even if we *knew* there was some threat from climate - we still have to decide whether to a) prepare for the what may be inevitable or b) perhaps vainly trying to stop it. Money spent on *one* means less spent on the other. *That* is at least *one* reason you might want to do nothing - so that money can more wisely be spent on real, and indisputable threats. Most climate alarmists appear ignorant or careless of the true cost of ineffectual and/or unnecessary climate policies in terms of human lives lost to cancer, famine and war.
While we were spending trillions on climate change we were spending almost zero on PPE. For the epidemics we knew had to come. That is why.
2) CO2 levels are historically far below the levels when life first flourished - seven or eight thousand parts per million of air, and we are relatively close to the point - 150ppm at which pretty much all plant life is extinguished and animals with it. CO2 is known to boost crops, and plants need less water in A CO2 rich climate. Market gardeners - and some home gardeners pump it into their greenhouses where trees saplings grow twice as fast. Once again - there is little information what levels we are aiming for. A huge increase in CO2 levels has not even proportionally affected average temperatures - which have risen only a degree or so since the coldest period in the [current] Holocene interglacial - the last 10-15,000 years or so. That cold period was the Little Ice Age - 1300-1850 AD, when millions starved and froze across Europe, and the Thames regularly froze solid. I don't know how far back into that nightmare you want to take us, but I can tell you for nothing - right now - that more still die from extreme cold weather than hot. That does it for me. No use arguing tipping points when it has been warmer in the past (Medieval Warm Period, Roman Warm Period, Holocene Maximum - and the world still did not "tip" into runaway temperatures.
CO2 is plant food. It is greening the earth, boosting crops and feeding the starving millions. It is now already in short supply. That is why.
Unfortunately governments are not making this a top priority. In that situation individuals have to do as much as they can, and also vote for governments that will take the situation seriously
Thanks for your comment
We create a better livable future at the expense of living a lot less comfortable than today. The alternative is we live as comfortably as long as we can until the climate becomes too warm and suffer for eternity or go extinct.
That is the hard choice we have to make.
You do realize that out of all the different animals on Earth that humans come in second when it comes to having the most efficient sweating and cooling system. The horse is number one but they do not actually sweat like us they use a different gland.
We are the only mammal that relies on secreting water onto the surface of our skin to stay cool. When it comes to sweating and sweat glands we have 10 times the density of chimpanzees. Chimpanzees and gorillas dump excess body heat by panting, so it stands to reason that our early human ancestors probably panted but somewhere we made a hard turn.
We didn't develop that adaptation because we were on a cold planet rather it suggests that we adapted to a very hot and dry climate. The best guess is a mixed bag. Our body suggests we lived where it was rather hot and since we adapted this ability to sweat and cool down more efficiently than literally every other animal on the planet we may have used it to become an ever greater predator.
Humans are amazing long-distance runners too. If you combine those two adaptations together to hunt it suggests we had a huge advantage not just in the summer months but at the hottest part of the day. Other animals tend to try and cool off and minimize anything they do because they can not cool off like us. So what better time to chase an animal down than mid-day with the sun blazing in the sky when the day is at its hottest. We can run for miles and as they say 'break a sweat' and the prey gives up and drops from exhaustion and overheating.
@@JosePerez-bi4ge If the rate of environmental changes is gradual, living things can evolve to adapt. You are overlooking at the rate of change and also the unknown effect of tipping points. All mass extinction events are related to sudden climate changes.
@@jk35260 your way of talking is exactly what the WEF wants to see, a reason to comply with being a slave while elites continue living extravagantly.
Perhaps we better all die
if its rising by 6mm a year and doubling every 6 years then its rising by about 768mm in 2064 and then 1536mm in 2070, plus if you add up each rise for each year its way above any prediction of 500mm by the end of the century
Luckily this is not true
@@jimmoses6617 Don't expect most on this site to pay attention to any facts.
@@jimmoses6617 Correct, actually the northern east coast is sinking faster than the ocean is "rising". If it was such an issue, why did Obama and the Gorical buy beach front properties?...................... The answer to most of this is the carbon offset racket. Always follow the money.
@@jimmoses6617 Fascinating but sad to me. Despicable and evil people using people's best intentions against their own interests.
@@jimmoses6617 😁 One guy wrote that he's concerned the mass of the melting glacier that's near to him is so large that volcanic mud is going to cover him! 😂😂😂 Where the heck does HE live!??? 😂😂😂
Sea level rise will never happen at any noticeable amount. 50cm of sea level rise in the next 100 years, scary stuff.
Things are a lot worse than you think. Sea level rise is the least of our worries. The collapse of agriculture will happen soon, because of heat drought and flooding. Sea level rise means people will have to move. Collapse of agriculture means people will starve.
Thanks for your comment.
why can't we use our weapons to destroy the ice shelf faster?
I like the way you think! 😄
Yeah, that's the spirit, Nuke Antarctica!
I've been covering the climate collapse on my channel for years now. This is a great explanation!
Thanks, keep up the good work!
Problem is that it’s very misleading
christiana figueres : the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.
@@WilbertRobichaud sadly I must agree. The Marxists are funding academics (mainly Marxists or Marxist led) to reinforce their narrative
Regan, it is total BS. It isn't happening. The cumulative icepack is growing, not going down. There hasn't been any warming since 1998.
Thank you for the video. You didn't mention the Volcano's under Antarctica. Antarctica is home to the largest volcano range on earth, greater than east Africa and the Himalayas. Scientists also believe there are more volcanoes to be found in Antarctica, meaning there are more secrets to uncover.
EXACTLY! INCLUDING THE ORCA SUBMARINE VOLCANO WHICH RECENTLY HAD 85,000 EARTHQUAKES
Great post. 👍 Only a propaganda shill would have failed to mention volcanic/ tectonic activity under Antarctica. Deception Island has very little ice and has been active for recent decades.
Science may not lie but scientists do lie.
In the current American election, climate is not polling among the top concerns for voting. We just will not change until we collapse. That’s just how we are built.
Compulsory vx for kiddies WILL collapse the population.
no matter what happens to climate no amount of effort could have prevented this change it would need to be hundred years ago to have any effect. when it was realised already to late because there is more to this story than fossil fuel it is also profits now it is finding enough food and shelter,
@@grahamthomas4804 The planet IS 20% greener BECAUSE of CO2.
@@grahamthomas4804 That's absolutely ridiculous. We could have changed drastically only a handful of decades ago and made a significant impact on the problem, probably enough to reduce it to a mere speedbump. The operative word here is "DRASTICALLY", which we absolutely will not do unless forced to do so. This is why we will fail - we are absolutely bound to impotent half measures. Physics will step in and do the heavy lifting for us where we should have done it ourselves.
@@GordoGambler You're confusing side effects with solutions. It doesn't matter if it's 5%, 20% or 50%. The end result is the same; plants begin to process CO2 abnormally past a certain threshold in the real world situation, since heat and water stresses will easily overcome any short term gains from the CO2 alone, after which the CO2 in the atmosphere will absolutely SKYROCKET when such paltry natural mitigations begin to fail worldwide. This whole "But but but CO2 is good for plants!" argument makes about as much sense as setting a hypothermia victim on fire. But but but they'll be warmer!
Let me put it like this so you can more easily understand what you're arguing for:
Plants in a greenhouse with elevated CO2 levels also have a rigidly controlled environment going on to prevent the plants from being KILLED. You have to have actually attempted greenhousing to be aware of how fucking fickle plants really are. Trust me when I say, they're very needy bitches indeed.
This situation is ridiculously opposite of that. It's an uncontrolled fiasco and only going to get worse. You're essentially arguing for a death-greenhouse with no environmental controls to consider the sensitive nature of plants. You're essentially arguing for green deserts by simply injecting CO2 into them, ignoring all the other glaring wrongs in the system.
Looking forward who will be the next Noah.
The Ice-age melt did cause a FLOOD. GloBULL warming, not so much ,,,,
NOAA?
I believe everything this man is saying. I might not be around when my grandchildren face this tragedy...I worry about their future.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts
Nevermind your grandchildren, unless you're like 90 years old, chances are you children will experiencing extreme suffering from all this.
Or you might be around. Records are being broken. The models are not working. This thing is speeding up, there is no good news.
If you can, start a trust for your descendants for when it's going to get hard to live. A livable wage will be the least of their worries.
You only believe. Try to gain knowledge.
Humanity is going to learn some very hard lessons.
It seems that way
I'm old enough that I won't see the worst consequences of anthropogenic global warming, but it looks like younger generations will. Especially here in America, the science deniers have obstructed humanity's attempts to deal with the problem.
Thank you for watching and your comment
Ahhhh so you've never looked at date further back than the middle of the last Ice age?????
You literally took the temperature in the middle of winter and now it's the middle of summer you are worried it won't ever stop getting hotter .........
😂👍
Gullible chump
Carbon is a scam
@@OutThereLearning I'm worried about Al Gore getting back in the office we will never survive that I know that Miami is going to be underwater but Atlanta too. .
Critical figures will not be allowed in this new age control.
@@onewordhereonewordthere6975 Miami Beach is already experiencing a rapidly increasing amount of sunny day flooding and are installing larger sea walls and pumps everywhere because of sea level rise. They're also now raising roads and buildings by a couple of feet so they don't get flooded so much.
This is already happening.
Lets hope you dont live long enough to vote again.
If a large percentage of antarctic land is below sea level under the ice, what's the data and numbers on how that volume is accounted for in the models?
It's been taken into account.
@@hosnimubarak8869
Not very helpful, but appreciate the response.
A large percentage is also on land that is held up by the ice sheets.
@@adriansmith1697
Sure. And a lot is anchored far below sea level.
As this video shows and describes, ice sitting in a bowl that's below sea level. Ice is water.
How is that water, which is already where the ocean would be, accounted for?
It's water below sea level and it's connected to the sea.
Wonder how much lift will the land get when the weight of the ice has gone
We hit tipping point LONG time ago. Ocean's Sea Salt levels were on a decline for 300-200 years and have accelerated due to fresh water runoffs. Acceleration is being blamed by humans and carbon - methane contributions. However, this increased atmospheric carbon - methane has happened many times over-and-over throughout Earth's history. Throughout Earth's history higher levels of SALT in our Oceans have stabilized Earth's climate. Instable climate Increases fresh water run offs, a negative feedback loop. There is probably only one solution THAT MAN CAN DO (this time around), and that is to add SALT to major ocean current Earth's beltways. >>>>>>> LET THAT SINK IN >> save Earth by correctly diagnosing the problem
We forget Earth is one a kind planet. 😢😢 let’s hope this generation of young people can change stubborn politics. Remember the universe is just too big. No where to go and live.
Scientists need to hire advertising firm to get message out , because they have failed in doing so
👍this message is succinctly crystal clear…. but the status quo dinosaurs in denial still are too stupid to get it until they are treading water😐
40 years to late 😪 shame on our governments also my country🇱🇺 Dutch
i surmise; that as the ground of the continent of Antarctica becomes exposed, stuff will grow. The research proved algae moved in at a distant high temperature/CO2 point. Perhaps a continent sized contribution to global photosynthesis is just the sort of built in balance that nature has in store.
Truly terrifying! In just a couple of generations the map of the earth may have to be changed.
+4.6 metres / century after all ~70 ice shelves have gone is the final bottom line. Could take centuries for ALL ice shelves to be gone though.
@@grindupBaker True...just 1 m rise will change things so radically 250-300 million coastal residents will be displaced. Beckwidth thinks sea level rise could be a couple of meters by 2050 if rate of doubling is every 10 yrs. What do you think of that?
@filamcouple_teamalleiah8479 Oh I think a huge amount of that ever since I heard it July 2019 and nearly fell off my chair because I'd thought Paul Beckwith was an OKish mediocre, probably-useful connect-the-dots kind of informer for the unwashed masses (peppered with mistakes that don't really matter). That's when I realized after 12 months that Beckwith is either a sickening, lazy imbecile or a sickening charlatan, or both, and I've found his Business Model mostly disgusting ever since (plus he blitzes around in 15 ton power boats when not bemoaning global warming, and has the chutzpah to post videos of that on his climate disaster channel). In 48 months the stinking coward has never even once responded to me pointing out that it's impossible beyond imbecilic because he's predicting a Snowball Earth in just 46 years because ice 6 metres thick covering the global ocean that he predicts will reflect about half the sunshine and that's a cooling many times as much as what causes an Ice Age. I mean ... really ... for fuck's sake ... just how much total BANAL CRAP can a sickening charlatan spew at the stupid part of the humans .... and they just lap it up. You wonder why I'm non-stop pissed off at bods spouting such foul CRAP ? ps: I'm not referring to what you had, never heard it, but Beckwith keeps "predicting" 7 metres of SLR by 2070 to keep his Business Model exciting. Your "rate of doubling is every 10 yrs" is brain dead isn't it ? Yes of course. Any person with a functioning brain knows that's brain dead. That isn't how physical science is done. Physical science is done by studying the physical properties for fuck's sake. I fell off my chair when Jim Hansen spouted that CRAP. When did Jim give up on being a scientist ? If the ice sheets were losing no ice at all 30 years ago then the ice loss rate would have increased infinitely in the last 30 years, not "doubling every 10 yrs" but increasing infinitely so all gone and 63 metres sea level rise by the time you read this. It's drivel isn't it ? For Pete's sake, grow a brain man. That's not science. I was massively disappointed in Jim Hansen when he pulled this junk-science "doubling rate" crap in a talk and turns out he's putting that crap in published papers also. That isn't part of the process of performing physical science. One expects that crap from mediocre charlatans like a "Paul Beckwith" making his money off this sort of banal crap, but not from a practising, publishing climate scientist. So very disappointing.
@filamcouple_teamalleiah8479 "just 1 m rise will change things so radically". Yes, this is going to become an increasingly big, then huge, then humongous deal as the decades progress. There are Roman fish ponds that are designed to let in and trap fish with the tides, they still work. Sea level, there at least, has changed by no more than a few inches over 2,000 years. 1 metre rise is a massively-expensive thing that is utterly certain over the next few decades.
I would advise viewers who believe the worst is caused by human activity to view 'Patrick Moore, 2015 lecture - should we celebrate Carbon dioxide'. Consider other scientists evidence.
That lecture would be best enjoyed with a tall cool glass of RoundUp.
97% of Climate Scientists agree with Climate Change. You choose to go with the 3%. Think about that.
@@BatMan-oe2gh LOL. That's been totally debunked. Only a MORON keeps spouting this BS.
@@jimmoses6617
Do you think saying "the science is settled" is more anti science than saying one could drink a whole quart of RoundUp without any harm?
we are currently in a major ice age
have been for 2.6 million years
Antarctica froze 34 million years ago
99% of the last 245 million years were warmer than today
We have been emerging from the last ice age for over 10,000 years, and what happened millions of years ago is completely irrelevant to what we are doing to our environment and our climate right now.
@@Stealthbong
you’re confusing glaciations with ice ages
we emerged from the last glaciation 12,000 years ago
we are still in an ice age
ice ages consist of many glaciations, separated by interglacials
we are in one such interglacial today, called the Holocene interglacial
@@johnvoelker4345 How would any of this be relevant to the warming the Earth is experiencing now?
@@Stealthbong
global warming would be beneficial for the biosphere
the Earth is too cold
@@johnvoelker4345 That’s purely subjective. Flora and fauna were doing just fine. Anthropogenic emissions of GHGs are pushing temperature rises up at a rate that is approx 10 times faster than at any time in the paleoclimatic record. Flora and fauna are not going to have the time to adapt and much of our biosphere is going to struggle with rapid warming. And then there is the coastal inundation from thermal expansion and ice loss they will have to deal with.
Really is a discrepancy between nature's capture of carbon and non-capture. Eg..the melt after the freeze
Okay - it's now April 2023 . Is there any new videos we can watch the ice melt ? Just curious.. John
Thank you.
Very clear. Very sober.
Indeed
Guess we will have to do what we've been doing for the last 30,000 years, take another step back. All these things seem solvable and if they aren't well, the earth will solve it for us.
The effect of the earth's tilt cracked the single tectonic plate, into mostly coastal plates, and produced the mountain ranges with seashells on top of mountains, from the sea floor. When most of the Global ice, melts it will return to the atmosphere as water vapor, the energy of the earth's magnetic field will return the earth tilt back to zero. The mountains will return to the sea floor, the salt water will return to its original position of protecting the single tectonic plate from the earth's mantle. The amount of steam produced will seal the tectonic plate again.
But this Antarctica melting tipping point had been discussed and use to frighten the people over and over again and yet EVERY YEAR the amount of ice falling on Antarctica had been RISING....not declining.
The overall ice mass of Antarctica is shrinking, not increasing. Thanks for watching
It’s becoming more obvious the deeper we go into the Eddy Minimum.
@@OutThereLearning Doesn't matter how often you repeat the BS it's still BS.
@@OutThereLearning No it isn't.
ua-cam.com/video/zW-i-F7ACL4/v-deo.html
@@hoptoads ice loss is rapidly increasing on both Greenland and Antarctica. You're conflating surface ice balance, which only considers ice that's directly melting or sublimating versus new snow accumulation, with the total ice balance. Once you include the ice that's being melted and flowing into the seas, the picture changes drastically and we see *massive* ice loss.
process is unstopable....only thing to discuss now is how long do humans have left
Thank you for your comment.
Since we don't know with certainty how fast the climate will warm in the future or how fast the sea will rise I find unnecessarily negative to think only about how long we have. If for no other reason I feel it is important to be honest with the younger generation about the potential severity of the future we face, but to also talk about the positive steps that are being taken. The coming generation needs to see that we adults are hopeful for the future.
This planet is really out last best hope for survival. There are attempts by Space X and others to prepare for living in space and on Mars for example, but that is long term possibility. However if a manned mission to Mars were successful that could inspire the world to work harder at what we can do here on Earth.
@@michaeldeierhoi4096 thank you for your thoughts
Just amazing how completely sure some are.
@@jimmoses6617 Hey Jim, Just thought I'd tell you about a very significant start to my skepticism with the 'global warming.' As a high schooler, I read the Time Magazine article ('75) about the 'coming' ice age. Well, that is how it is always reported now, but in fact it was put forth as a theory. A THEORY that we may be heading towards an ice age BASED ON THIRTY YEARS(!) OF TEMPERATURE READINGS IN THE US. The 1930's in the US had been exceptionally hot and subsequently the temps since then into the seventies had been slowly falling. An interesting article on a general subject of my interest, but back in the day, there was nowhere near the level of everything being political. So, I just filed it in the back of my head. AND only 7 years later I start reading articles TELLING us that the Earth is warming and it's BECAUSE of man's pollution. I was taken aback by the 180 degree turn - and I'm NOT talking about the cold to warming. Science presented a THEORY based on thirty years of data. 'Something other than science' was now not only TELLING us of warming but also WHY without giving any data at all. All they would do is explain the THEORY of the greenhouse effect and then act like it was completely true. I don't even know how well I could have voiced what I had picked up on, but my BS meter was on high alert. And even after all the climategate email scams, known fudging of the data, ludicrous predictions and more, I still just considered myself a 'skeptic' because I couldn't prove them wrong. I'm also not a scientist. It was only in 2015 after reading parts of The Paris Climate Accords that I finally just called bullsh_t on the whole thing. And I've not come across anything before or since that has changed my mind. If you are not aware of SuspiciousObservers(dot)org, check it out, especially the playlist on climate change. Have a good day.
A question
If the ice desapear from the polar reagons
The ground below Will rise?
(Do to the desapear of all that weight?
Good question. Yes it will over time, as can be seen all around the coasts of Northern Europe (eg Scotland) where there are raised beaches due to this
@MAXIMUSLOK The land rebounds, rises, at a minuscule rate for hundreds of thousands of years like an inch per century or something (if it actually interested a person they could easily find the actual ultra-slow rates of course).
Here is a wikipedia link about it: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-glacial_rebound
No one is going to want to live on a frozen earth as opposed to moving.
do underground nuclear tests around Yellowstone
But there is no evidence that we are taking it seriously enough! CO2 levels continue to increase
The problem is the fossil oil based economies that are in majority on this planet. To stop using fossil fuel is pretty much impossible for the moment. The governments of the world and some people make tons of money literally and they do not wish to end this treat (for them).
The US still generates a substantial amount of electricity using coal. I’m a proud doomer.
Oil and gas are renewable resources, says Thomas Gold in his book "Deep hot biosphere".
Engineer Hans Joachim Zillmer wrote the same in his book "The energy fallacy: Why natural gas and oil are inexhaustible".
The Russians know this for a long time and has successfully reproduced it in the laboratory.
I came into personal contact with one of the leading Russian abiotic scientists, Vladimir Kutcherov, then a professor at the Swedish Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden's ETH or MIT. We met several times and he tutored me in the confirmed deep earth origins of all hydrocarbons. Not from dead dinosauer detritis and biological remains.
Rather oil is being constantly generated from deep in the core of the Earth in the giant nuclear oven we call the core.
Under enormous temperature and pressure, the primal methane gas is forced to the surface through what they term migration channels in the Earth's mantle. [2]
Indeed, Kutcherov demonstrated that existing "depleted" oil wells, left capped for several years, had been proven to "refill" with new oil from deep under. Depending on the elements the methane migrates through on its upwards journey, it remains gas, becomes crude oil, tar or coal.
First of all, the CO2 measurement is being taken at the top of a volcano in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. Second of all, CO2 makes up less than one half of one-tenth of one percent of the atmosphere. "ppm" stands for "parts per million." 427.44 ppm = 427.44 / 1,000,000 = 0.00042744 = 0.042744%. Third, trees and plants need CO2 in order to survive and thrive. Zero CO2 means zero trees and plants, which means zero life on Earth.
Do you know why most hydroponic shops and garden centers sell CO2 tanks, CO2 generators, and CO2 modulators? They sell them because the optimal atmospheric CO2 levels for most trees and plants is between 800 ppm and 2000 ppm. Some trees and plants thrive in when there's more than 2000 ppm of CO2 in the ambient atmosphere. More CO2 means bigger healthier plants and higher yields, which means more food and more life. Do you know that carbon is the building block block of life? You are made from carbon. Everything you can see and touch is made from carbon. You exhale carbon dioxide (one carbon molecule attached to two oxygen molecules). This is all basic math and science
Yes. We need CO2 to rise because it’s PLANT FOOD!
0.04% of our atmosphere is CO2. 95.7% of that percentage is produced by NATURE.
So let’s get rid of nature then eh?
FFS.
Antarctica wasn't always a frozen continent. The Arctic Circle wasn't always frozen either. Over the last 700,000 years there have been 8 different ice ages. That's 8 different extreme cooling periods and 8 different extreme warming periods. What caused those? You can't say humans, can you?
Thanks, good question. That's why climate scientists research these natural cycles intensively to understand what causes them so that they can distinguish the natural vs the human drivers of present climate change
The feedbacks from Antarctic, Arctic and Greenland ice melt / sea level rise, ocean stratification, thawing permafrost, forest fires, droughts and other severe weather events are all very concerning. Some of the social impacts we will see before these become an even bigger significant issue are a 40% decline in global potable water by 2030. Europe and the US have seen huge decline in their aquifer resources. The fossil fuel and meat industry industry need holding to account on the amount of water it uses as this is a more proximate threat to our populations as is air pollution.
An estimated 100,000,000 to 200,000,000 refugees and displaced people by 2030 due to water shortages. Such numbers will destabilise the affected country and its neighbours and will certainly agravate their water problems not to mention their food problems. Displaced people are like an army moving across a country: they will consume an awful lot of food and reduce that available to the markets causing runs on food prices and limits on exports.
Water security is seldom spoken about in the west yet both the US and Europe will see accelerating problems with water over the next decade.
Adaptation and mitigation needs to consider both decarbonisation and water resources. We are already seeing huge problems with water in the US, Asia and Europe with less snow fall on mountain ranges and decreasing acquifers.
Thank you for your comment. Indeed concerning
civil unrest will lead to authoritarianism, and combined with the strangle hold the doctrine of shortterm profit maximization has on governance... well .... dystopia won't be a feature of movies and books but rather something you see outside your window
Thank you 😊
You're welcome 😊
Great educational video. Putting it in the historical perspective makes it much more impactful 👍
Thank you
Ahhhh so you've never looked at date further back than the middle of the last Ice age?????
You literally took the temperature in the middle of winter and now it's the middle of summer you are worried it won't ever stop getting hotter .........
Gullible mugs
Propaganda is not education.
@@OutThereLearning ("Fake Science of Ice Collapse") with fraudulent graphs, and fake data 6:00. In 2021 Antarctica had its coldest winter reaching -111 Celsius (without windchill), the coldest ever recorded temp on earth !!!! Every arctic/antarctic summer, when there is daylight there, they film normal ice-shelf collapses, and melts, and call it disappearing. If the (very natural) summer ice-melts were NOT to happen, the winter ice-buildups would have already reached the heavens !!!! Imagine a million years of ice-buildup of one meter per year, making 1000,000 meters === 1000 kilometers, which is twice as high as the altitude where the fake ISS is supposed to be !!!! Now, if count 10 million years, then the ice would have accumulated to 10,000 kilometers !!! Wake-up people!!
@@truthandfreedom8145 yer you are gullible
Can you address the difference between correlation and causality between temperature and carbondioxide, as well as the fact that sometimes carbonioxide increase trails behind temperature increase and sometimes it leads temperature increase?
No. Because this video's for ice sheets glaciology. You want a video about cooking which is with the utensils & dishes on the 3rd floor near the lingerie. Glad to answer your question.
@@grindupBaker This answer should be located in the basement in the misdirection section.
The Cosmosians will study this for centuries. If those damn humans could have struck a balance between Capitalism and what is best for all of Humanity they could have survived.
More Alarmist Nonsense ... The 'Buttressing Effect' is an unproven hypothesis. A floating ice shelf with nothing restraining it out to the open sea will not hold back a landward sheering force .. Some nice ice falling into the sea clips though. It's what Ice Sheets do naturally....
Pfffft, so you are a Climate scientist, are you? Keep your head in the sand. It suits you.
@@BatMan-oe2gh , did I say I was a Climate Scientist? Is your statement some sort of 'Appeal to Authority', if a scientist says something then he is 100% correct, plus he who is not a climate scientist can't question the 'science', because real science doesn't work that way.. if you are not sure about that fact, you need to pull your head out of somewhere else and study the work of Richard Feynman... Looking at the current Live data for both the Arctic and Antarctic their ice sheet extents are within the +/- standard 2 Deviations of Normal... But, maybe you will say it's the wrong type of ice?? Anything to belief the religious fanaticisms of the Alarmist Cult .. Idiots!!
@@kyrptohead Fifty years ago, Feynman wasn't talking about climate change denial or anti-vaxxers, but rather science education. All the deniers don't put up real evidence. And none of their work is actually peer reviewed.
No mention of the volcanic activity on the sdge of antartica , further inland the ice is getting thicker , strange you do not mention this at all ?.
Because that is not happening. The Ice is not getting thicker. The only thickness is between your ears.
Everything you said was BS that isn't based in credible research.
@@BatMan-oe2gh It is happening dum dum , look it up if you can read .
@@barriejones6564 I do read all the information. There is one hot spot under the Ross Ice Shelf. The majority are extinct. And the majority are based around the edge. The last known volcano eruption was 2200 years ago.
Funny how all you deniers come back at me with insults. Says a lot about your education.
@@BatMan-oe2gh So you know you lost the argument, then.
How is it that this mechanism is being lost on the average human? The earth has an air conditioner (if you include water in the definition of "air" - and, in this case, you should). The earth's air (or "climate") conditioner stores excess cold in the ice and compensates for excess heat by relessing the cold via melting the ice. Now, this "store" of cold has a limit. Now, as I have said before: once an un-ignoriable amount of coastline is flooded enough of the year that it is unusable, then the acceptance of a real necessity will bear the offspring of collective ingenuity and it will all go down in the history books as a great challenge full of intrigue and mystery that caused humans to foment a new flowering of compassion and beauty. Now, what are the ratios of spending between military and health? Are we really acting in concert with our ostensible ideals: values; honor; honesty; greatness; morality? God bless us, every two, er, one. Every One.
The graph showing the metres of sea level rise and the years its expected to happen along the bottom of the graph, ends at 10 metre ( 33 feet ).
BUT you will notice the Continents ice is mostly still intake. He mentions the geological evidence shows there was a 20 metre rise ( 66 feet ). The height of a 5 storey building FROM sea level.
Ice Shelves thinning, next video released a researcher is surprised how fast the ice shelves are growing back.😂
Nope. I wish that were so...
😔
The earth goes through cycles every 200 yrs , antartica is moving towards a warming era where all ice will melt and everything will turn green with wild life we may have never seen before
I truly wish that humans would think before they act🥵😭🥵 always realizing after there’s a problem!!!
Our lack of foresight is astounding!!!
For every action…..🙄🥵😅🥲😭🙏
Thank you for your comment
so what are you doing apart from crying or complaining
@@forbaldo1
A lot more than you, no doubt!🤨
nothing but emotions.
a dozen civilizations have perished partially due to climate change. but... when people don't care about people... we get what we get
Young people pissed off. Ya ,maybe they are angry on the subject of global warming, but that's just the subject of climate changes, the actual process of reversing their routines and usage of electricity and cell phones, will send them into total outrage.
Yeah blame young people. Do you remember leaded gasoline?😂😂😂
@@trevorknight7909 I'm going to try to be fair, but obviously the act of being outraged and committing to a routine that reflects on the issues in which someone any age is up in arms over is the first step,maybe the only real promise of being loyal to the idea of one individual doing what one individual can do to lessin their contribution to garbage, waste, litter,plastic, etc. Leaded fuel was a thing,the act of drilling for oil, the land that it inhabits and the process of oil refinery are numerous steps to left over scars towards the earth, the fuel when leaded was just an end result. But the cars that ran on leaded fuel were some of the funniest vehicles to drive and race down the street, like my 67GTO, worth every gallon of gasoline used, though the car is now worth to much to show off, to many thugs out here that are willing to steal anything.
That is a great presentation of the ice melting, problem is, people are closing their minds to all problems. We are a specie who waits until it's too late, expecting the calvary to ride in and save the day.
Every time, we here the Ice Melt around the world is melting faster than predicted, every prediction is wrong and we recalculate
Yet again with more bad news
People wait until the cavalry comes in because of the Abrahamic myths of the Messiah, the returning Jesus Christ, the Mahdi, and the 12th Imam. People are trained by their Rabbis, Priests, Ministers, Pastors, Televangelists, Sheiks, Ayatollahs and Imams and the religions these guys preach to expect a strong unseen hand from someplace to intervene when we get to the end of our rope and save us all.
I really hope we can save our selves, but I really have a feeling the Earth is gonna do what it’s gonna do all the coastal cities will have to move back in land
Former President Barack Obama and his family have completed the purchase of a $11.75 million waterfront house situated on nearly 30 acres on Martha's Vineyard -
April 2024 Ice has reached its highest mass point in over 20 years, so stop the panic!
So glad people still think they can control the weather. The science that snow melts does not tell you what is happening. If you want it to be cold your nuts . You'll freeze to death or starve because you can't grow food in the snow. What is really happening would shock you.
Trump "They say the ocean will rise one-eighth of an inch over the next 200 to 300 years.". That’s exactly what someone worried about their beachfront Mar-A-Lardo estates property value plummeting would say as he watches the shoreline creep closer to his lawn 🤣
I guess Obama with his new estate on the water don't matter either huh? Don't call one of them out..call them all out.
It does make you wonder how banks and insurance companies seem to take no issue with all the trillions of dollars of property that will become useless if Oceans do rise quickly. How can you even get a 30-year mortgage with such a threat looming over the property? Ever wonder that?
I had 8 blocks of my town flood out from Tropical Storm Sandy and you can not go back there to live ever again. That was the first time it flooded there in 115 years. So how and why would and could you fund 50-story buildings on the water, some being built today? Banks and insurance would never take such risks thats why nobody will ever live on those 8 blocks in my town again so something is very strange about that and the fact the rich and wealthy who scream about being green are the ones buying the land right at the edge of the water. It isn't BS they are doing it!
Trump the laughing stock of the usa
👏👍🌟📽most interesting Thank you
Thanks for watching!
In Pluvicopia, I argue that we will reach the 4-meter forecast by 2100. But the book's point is that we can use the energy in the water cycle to control sea level by eliminating the need for fossil fuels and displacing sufficient freshwater onto land, controlling atmospheric CO2 with afforestation and thereby saving biodiversity. The numerical modeling to design viable engineering only takes about 3 years because the system is very simple. Please give reason a chance and criticize my work honestly. Thanks.
NASA claims sea level is rising at 3.4mm per year. This is less than half a meter in a hundred years. The technological advancements that will be available to humanity in 2123 would make your head spin. We will likely be living on Mars and vacationing on the moon.
What is "energy in the water cycle". This couldn't possibly replace 100 million barrels of oil a day that humanity is currently using.
@anthonymorris5084 "NASA claims...." Yebbut these organizations are always much too many years behind when things are changing as fast as they are. Anybody who isn't as blind as a bat can clearly see that the SLR rate increased to 4.3 +/- 0.1 mm / year at 2010. Too recent to state any further increase though, a linear fit 2010-2023 is a very good fit. I do realize that you specifically have no interest at all but for anybody browsing past I find it interesting that the change happened 2010 because that's when the huge floods in Oz, South America & Asia somewhere caused the 7 mm (from memory) SL drop over a few months that then ran back into the ocean over a few months more (see crystal clear on SLR plots). However it wasn't cherry pick because I'm always careful to judge the actual trend fit well. Something must have occurred, changed, in 2010 that caused SLR to increase in perpetuity and also caused the big floods around Earth. I know for sure the simple thing that started in 1995 and got some other changes going but I haven't a clue what about Earth changed in 2010. Interesting stuff.
Once most of the Polar ice is melted, the huge weight of the ice, will be no longer, and the Earth' tilt of 23.5 will start returning back to zero. Because both the sun and earth are linked by their magnetic fields
"Antarctica may be melting faster than anyone realizes ..." Last year Antarctica experienced its second coldest winter in recorded history; some parts their coldest, with temperatures down to -98C (that's MINUS 98C). So what is this "may be melting" stuff? Looks suspiciously like irresponsible scaremongering.
Do some research. It's a big continent.
@@hosnimubarak8869 Yes, last year this big continent averaged the second coldest winter in recorded history. Do some research.
@@barbaramckenzie7157
The Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station measured record cold temperatures between the months of April and September 2021. These temperatures do not discredit climate change. A six-month period is not long enough to validate a climate trend. So, some metric of 6 months does not matter. The concern is for the longer-term trend of average change over decades.
@@hosnimubarak8869 Again, that's not the story that the alarmists have been peddling, though, is it? A single day of snow is significant evidence when alarmists have been scaremongering an "end to snow". A trifle disingenuous of alarmists to plead the long-term argument when it suits them, whilst the IPCC and their slavish mainstream media touts routinely point to weather events as evidence of long-term warning. You know it.
@@grahambennett8151
Do you deny 18 of the 19 warmest years on record have occurred since 2001?
I'm having a very hard time believing in stoping or slowing down melting of ice sheets. Throughout the history of mankind we've observed drastic changes in temperature and that's before the industrial revolution. Earth goes through cycles whether you like it or not and believing that you can control climate is idiotic. I'm all for clean air though, cut out light pollution while we're at it.
Your lack of scientific evidence is obvious
The fact climate has changed naturally doesn't prove modern day climate change isn't anthropogenic. In fact, it proves anthropogenic climate change. Because scientists have looked at natural climate change in the past, why it probably occured, and if the same factor is of influence today. Scientists haven't found any known natural cause that can explain current climate change without contribution by humans.
@@jaykanta4326 Try 700, 000 years of ice core evidence. Your lack of knowledge is obvious.
@@hoptoads and where is the scientific research published showing today’s warming climate is “natural”? I’ve read and research ice core data but I’m willing to review what research you can bring.
@@jaykanta4326 " I’ve read and research ice core data "
And obviously understood none of it.
It was a rainforest 90MilYA. Why not again?
We're so worried about this tiny slice in time, but over larger cycles Life was fine in bigger shifts & periods. Comet cataclysms should be the focus.
It's weird that humans are only worried about these few thousand years and not worried about what disasters might happen 345 million years from now, or a billion years in the future. Imbecile.
5:11 Interesting visualization. How is it possible that the Caspian Sea level can also rise by 20m when it has no natural connection to the ocean waters and the land in between has a higher elevation?
Thank you , your experience at Antarctica studying the ice sheets and the effects upon the planet is great information thank you ! ..I’ve worked on the ocean for 44 years , And since the 90.’s I’ve notice changes in the ocean and increasing as time passes . Thou Mankind can be at its best when we have reached our worst , that’s how I see it playing out .
Thank you for your comment
Brilliantly explained; perfect to use as an explainer for presentations on risks from sea level rise to Canterbury
Thanks for your positive feedback
I praise The Mutant Greta Thunberg. Them/they is a goddess of the climate cultists
Oh man. Good thing the Majority of the Marshall Islands have been growing since WWII, when they took Thousands of photographs of the islands and are able to compare them to todays coast line. Good Thing we don't need to Fear Monger about it.
Thanks for your comment. The growth of some of the Marshall islands has indeed occurred due to sediment accretion which has outpaced sea level rise. It is not due to any lowering of the sea level. Cheers
6:50 “Governments making it top priority” I haven’t laughed so hard in a long time. Yeah, sure. Top top priority. More like, let’s pretend we do something. Emissions are still RISING.
Fair comment!
I am going to disagree. Glaciers are rivers of ice that flow down hill because the weight of ice and snow push the mass down hill. Your animation shows "glacial retreat" but where is this happening? Be specific, as it can be said that many glaciers have actually grown in the last twenty years. The ice shelves in the eastern Antarctic peninsula grew by 85%. In Greenland, the Jakobshavn Glacier had measurable thickness increase since the 1990s.
Despite the fact that one particular glacier (the Jakobshavn Glacier) is growing, the whole Greenland ice sheet is still losing lots and lots of ice. Jakobshavn drains only about seven percent of the entire ice sheet, so even if it were growing robustly, mass loss from the rest of the ice sheet would outweigh its slight expansion.
@@hosnimubarak8869 I think what you have to explain is how the largest glacier would be growing whilst the rest are supposedly shrinking. "Lots and lots of ice" does not do it for me, "because even natural variations cause "lots and lots" of ice to form and/or melt. There are 30 thousand trillions of tonnes of ice on earth, and Greenland, despite its size, has but a small proportion of it. Strangely, climate alarmist scientists dismiss evidence from Greenland as being "local", and not representative of the world climate. They can't have it both ways!
Greenland is not such a good talking point for alarmists. Firstly, the Greenland Ice cores show that temperatures were higher thousands of years ago, when when men produced more greenhous gas from farting than they did through industrial activity, and it was still quite hard for people to light a camp fire. Secondly, Greenland was so warm it was settled by Viking farmers long before the industrial era. Areas, that is, where farms can no longer exist, because the ice mysteriously advanced when CO2 levels stayed pretty much the same. It's not just Greenland that was warmer, either. Grapes were grown further up mountains in Europe and in northerly places such as the north of England, where cultivation is no longer practical - even with our scientific advances in farming. Glacier moraines show that in the Middle Ages, glaciers retreated to higher levels than todays'
@@grahambennett8151
"I think what you have to explain is how the largest glacier would be growing whilst the rest are supposedly shrinking". You seriously don't know how glaciers grow?
@@grahambennett8151
" There are 30 thousand trillions of tonnes of ice on earth, and Greenland, despite its size, has but a small proportion of it".
It is the second largest ice body in the world, after the Antarctic ice sheet.
@@grahambennett8151
"climate alarmist scientists dismiss evidence from Greenland as being "local", and not representative of the world climate".
"Greenland Ice cores show that temperatures were higher thousands of years ago, when when men produced more greenhous gas from farting"
This argument is based on the work of Don Easterbrook who relies on temperatures at the top of the Greenland ice sheet as a proxy for global temperatures. That’s a fatal flaw, before we even begin to examine the use of the ice core data. A single regional record cannot stand in for the global record
Easterbrook is a regular speaker at the Heartland Institute's International Conference on Climate Change. The Heartland Institute and its conference sponsors have collectively received millions of dollars in funding from the fossil fuel industry.
Scientists reconstructing past Greenland temperatures now use estimates from many different ice cores, which reduces the uncertainties associated with any single one and gives a more accurate picture of changes over Greenland as a whole.
dont forget we now add 80 million new humans per year.....thats 80 cities as big as denver,,every year now...80 new cities as big as denver
Thank you for your comment, yes indeed.
True but also we're at a decline, statistics show that by the end of century we'll have more funerals than baby showers.
@@kevlarnegative We'll need to begin making a difference well before the end of the century for humans and all life to have any chance of prospering.
That is true, but global fertility rate (number of children born per woman) has declined fast over the past decades. I suggest looking at Hans Rosling, a statistician specialised on this topic, about the history and projected future of birth rate globally. He made a great documentary. If you search for "hans rosling don't panic" on youtube you'll find it.
@@RolfStones Interesting. Thanks for your suggestion.
World oil consumption is increasing. World coal consumption is increasing. World consumption of natural gas is increasing. Demand for airline travel is increasing. World population is increasing. Did I miss anything?
Einstein foretells us that the turning earth will wobble as the ice is melted. Fasten your seatbelts.
The number of deniers in the comments. Did not realise there were so many stupid people in the world.
I'm picking the video has been shared on some mad Facebook group or something and they've come to brigade the comments, that's usually what happens. Concentrated idiocy.
@@TWGNZ You got that right. Had an exchange with two of them, and they have not come back to me with their so-called proof that I asked for. It is just too easy to shoot these people down in flames when you hit them with facts. Cheers
Nothing is more ignorant or stupid than calling those that disagree with you "deniers".
@@grahambennett8151 Wrong, it is pointing out that they are denying the science. And their comment shows it with their stupid analogies.
Beautifully explained and illustrated. Thanks.
Thank you
ua-cam.com/video/J_IlgwmCkFE/v-deo.html
basically - an unstoppable process precluding the human extinction event- but not before world-wide turmoil, loss of resources, and a reverting to hunter-gatherer tribal collapse of - everything . . .
I know. It's only being so cheerful that keeps you going. LOL.
@aarqa only if you can’t tell the world how to refresher everything that melted and currently melting easy peasy
@aarqa actually you’re correct - it is stoppable - when there’s nothing left to melt. My bad
@@williamtomkiel8215 it's indeed unstoppable. We're still coming out of an ice age and the sun is heating
Headline should be "The POLITICAL science of ice collapse."
One of the best I've seen, excellent work.
Cheers!
Very informative
Thanks
Take the challenge to start driving less. Demand cities to make riding a bike safer with protected areas for bikes and other non-automobile, smaller and cheaper electric transportation to make it safer.
How does the frozen sample with 400ppm exist if it melts away at 400ppm 🤔. If it's froze then no problem at 400ppm, if it never froze then you don't have a ice sample at 400ppm so it must have froze so then it wasn't melted it was frozen at 400 ppm not melted into ocean, um anyone else using their brain 🤷🤷🤷🤷🤷